pal@crystal.UUCP (12/29/84)
Anybody who reads this newsgroup must have heard that
"Guns don't kill, people do." I present here what I believe
to be a strong argument that guns, at the very least, facil-
itate killing. The ideas presented here are not my own, the
idea and the figures are taken from "The honest politician's
giude to crime control" by Norval Morris and Gordon Hawkins,
published by The University of Chicago Press, 1970 (the fig-
ures are hence somewhat dated; if someone has more recent
statistics, please post them). The article is a little long
but I have not seen this particular analysis on the net
before.
The assumption behind the "guns don't kill" argument
is that equally dangerous alternative weapons are readily
available and would be used by potential criminals to the
same effect as firearms. This assumption is not borne out
by the available evidence, as seems reasonable in light of
the greater range, potency and functionality of firearms in
conflict situations. The use of a gun does not require phy-
sical contact with the victim and requires considerably less
strength, agility and skill than does the use of, say, a
knife.
As an alternative assumption, consider the hypothesis
that the difference between homicide and aggravated assault
is more a matter of outcome than of intent. To quote from
my reference (pp. 57-8):
"The line between willful homicide and aggravated
assault is uncertain; other than in terms of the
outcome of violence. The speed of the ambulance,
the competence of the surgeon, and the fortuitous
point of impact of the missile or weapon do more to
distinguish between these crimes than does any
analysis of states of mind of the assailants."
Further, on page 66:
"...the available evidence shows that there is great
homogeneity in the pattern of most homicide and ag-
gravated assault cases in respect of such variables
as time of occurence, location, situational context,
ofender-victim relationship, and prior arrest
records. THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO LIES
IN THE FACT THAT A FIREARM IS MORE COMMON IN HOMI-
CIDES WHILE A KNIFE IS MORE COMMON IN ASSAULTS; this
fact, in the absence of evidence that firearm at-
tacks are generally more seriously intended than
knife or other types of attacks, may be attributed
to the greater lethal potential of the gun. More-
over ... a recent investigation of physical patterns
of knife and gun wounding in Chicago suggests that
roughly the same proportion of each is seriously in-
tended, and so THE DIFFERENTIAL FATALITY RATES CAN-
NOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO VARIANCE OF INTENT." [Emphases
mine]
The authors go on to give more arguments in support of
the claim that the difference between homicide and assault
is not generally attributable to motive or the nature of the
aggressors. If you can get hold of the book, you may want
to read it.
Given this assumption, it is reasonable to compare the
outcomes of attacks with different weapons. The fatality
rates for the three most common modes of attack are:
Mode of attack Fatality Rate (%)
Gun 13
Knife 3
Fists, hands, feet 1.7
To me, at least, the argument appears compelling. Of
course, other arguments remain, primarily regarding the
feasibility of gun control, but I think the myth that "Guns
don't kill" can be laid to rest.riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) (12/29/84)
> Mode of attack Fatality Rate (%) > Gun 13 > Knife 3 > Fists, hands, feet 1.7 An interesting argument and an interesting statistic. We've also seen statistics posted recently listing the number of handgun- related deaths per year in the U.S. and in various nations with handgun control laws. It would also be interesting to see the non-handgun-related homicide statistics for those same countries. Does anyone have them handy, or know where I can look them up? --- Prentiss Riddle ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.") --- {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddle
shindman@utcs.UUCP (Paul Shindman) (01/03/85)
<quote follows at end of article> The annual murder statistics were published this week in the Toronto newspapers for 1984. Although I don't have the articles handy, Toronto had about 50 murders in 1984, of which only a few were committed with firearms. Toronto has a population of about 2.1 million, and is often compared to cities like Detroit or others of similar size. (I know I'm digressing a bit here, but since everyone likes to talk about numbers...) Anybody have murder stats for other cities in the 1.5 to 3 million range??? In article <554@ut-sally.UUCP> riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) writes: >> Mode of attack Fatality Rate (%) >> Gun 13 >> Knife 3 >> Fists, hands, feet 1.7 > >An interesting argument and an interesting statistic. > >We've also seen statistics posted recently listing the number of handgun- >related deaths per year in the U.S. and in various nations with handgun >control laws. It would also be interesting to see the non-handgun-related >homicide statistics for those same countries. Does anyone have them handy, >or know where I can look them up? >